In recent years, the use of visioning as a tool for developing regional land use scenarios has become rather common. Typically, visioning is performed in a cooperative of business owners, the community, and local officials, and results in a set of regional development goals for the region’s future. This is a very different approach to thinking about a region’s future than predictive models calibrated on historical data. In general, visions are created on the basis of stakeholder preferences. Consequently, direct comparisons of results for the two methods are not really relevant. However, it is important to understand how the two approaches differ and that both offer their own relative advantages from a planning perspective. In an effort to better appreciate what each approach offers, this paper compares and contrasts these two methods, featuring the Austin Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) as a case study. The preferred vision, produced by the Envision Central Texas (ECT) organization, offers the greatest potential for public involvement in identifying regional development goals for the future. The land use models have a strong theoretical foundation and allows for interactions with a transportation model. Moreover, the land use models have the potential to identify key strategies that can be used in achieving the region’s goals. Thus, the combination of these two approaches seems to offer the greatest opportunities for planners to achieve a future that accommodates all stakeholders.
similar papers:
No comments:
Post a Comment